Jonassen et al, 1994
From Eduwiki
Julian & Hugh
Learning with Media: Restructuring the Debate
The authors of Learning with Media: Restructuring the Debate provide an alternate view of media in education and place special attention on the role of the learner rather than the effects of instruction. They argue that people do not learn from media, they learn from thinking. This is in direct contrast to existing views of media and education as provided by Kozma and Clark. The debate, as they frame it, should focus on the learner-centered conception of learning. In this paradigm, media is not merely a vehicle but rather a tool to enhance the learning process. The discussion proceeds into two divergent perspectives that are defined as macro-level learner-centered and micro level instruction-centered arguments about media. The attributes of the human learner are far more important than the attributes of the media. In the authors view media exists to support, not control, the learning and construction of knowledge. They argue that the debate over instruction delivery though media is misguided and that research focus should be on the learner not the delivery vehicle.
The authors view media as environments and tools affording and facilitating the thinking required of a learner. They discuss the situational or context aspect of learning. The environment affects the learning experience and the author feels that manipulating the learning process by enhancing the environment will reap rewards. They continue by asserting that learning is most effective when situated in the context of some meaningful real-world task.
The authors also discuss the effects of the media as vehicles to capture the experience of an event, and contend that the media acts as a filter for the learners perception of reality. The uncertainty principle is described as "the act of observation intervening and changing that being observed," and is used to discuss the impossibility of of being an objective observer because the method of observation interferes with the process being observed.
Jonassen et al, believe that media are best suited as a facilitator in the construction of knowledge, through the provision of mediated "contexts." The media is used to simulate, not recreate a real-world authentic context.
The authors assert that the media is part of the context in which learners construct knowledge, and that learning is “distributed between the media, the learner, and the context” in which the learning takes place. The concept of distributed intelligence explains that intelligence is manifest in activity and distributed between learners, the activity they are engaged in, the tools they use, the community of colleagues, and the discoveries of colleagues in the past. In line with Kozma, the authors suggest the computer should be allocated the role of tasks it does best such as computational and memory tools. They assert the learner should be responsible for recognizing patterns of information and then organizing it, while the computer should perform calculations, store, and retrieve, information.
In light of Determinism, Quanta, and Chaos, the authors cite that the media is part of the context and that it is not possible to know exactly how people learn but know that they do learn. The effectiveness of media can not accurately be determined simply by evaluating its attributes. The important factor here is to try to understand how media can be best used to facilitate knowledge construction on the part of learners, and focus questions on the effects of learners’ cognitions with technology as opposed to the effects of technology. Considering the environment in which media is used is important because knowledge is a function of how individuals create meaning from their experiences. The more authentic or real world the leaning context is, the easier it is for learners to relate these contextual experiences to their own and thus construct new knowledge.
From a micro level, instruction centered perspective people do not learn from media. They learn from thinking which is mediated by perception and attention and which are further mediated by activities that engage those cognitive processes. “By knowing the type or kinds of cognitive processes required to complete a task, a multiple resources model will suggest complementary attributes for perceptual and response modalities.”
The authors conclude that understanding the learning process should come first, then the role of context and the kinds of environments and the tools needed to support that learning. Only then should we consider the affordances of media for creating those environments or providing those tools.
